Network Governance in the Korean Telecom Market

This chapter replies to key criticisms about policy networks, the core executive, and governance. On networks, the chapter discusses the context of networks, and the ability of the theory to explain change. On the core executive, it discusses a shift away from a focus on the prime minister to court politics. On governance, the chapter returns to redefining the state, steering networks, metagovernance, and storytelling. It restates the case for the idea of the differentiated polity. This is edifying because it provides a vocabulary for a more accurate description of British government. Finally, the chapter provides a link to Volume II by summarizing the decentred approach to the differentiated polity.

Download Full-text

Colliding Coordination Structures in Multilevel Systems of Government (and How to Live with It)

10.1093/oso/9780198825074.003.0005 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Morten Egeberg ◽

Jarle Trondal

Keyword(s):

Network Governance ◽

Administrative System ◽

Public Governance ◽

Multilevel Systems ◽

Nation States ◽

Governance Systems ◽

And Control ◽

Coordination And Control

This chapter discusses governance dilemmas that are often overlooked in studies that do not encompass the ecology of organization in public governance. The chapter discusses how coordination structures may counteract each other in multilevel systems of government. The ambition of the chapter is twofold: Firstly, a coordination dilemma is theoretically and empirically illustrated by the seeming incompatibility between a more direct (interconnected) and sectorally specialized implementation structure in the multilevel EU administrative system and trends towards strengthening coordination and control within nation states. Secondly, the chapter discusses organizational arrangements that may enable governance systems to live with the coordination dilemma in practice. This coordination dilemma seems to have been largely ignored in the literature on EU network governance and national ‘joined-up government’ respectively.

Download Full-text

Network governance forms in healthcare: empirical evidence from two Italian cancer networks

BMC Health Services Research ◽

10.1186/s12913-020-05867-2 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Anna Romiti ◽

Mario Del Vecchio ◽

Gino Sartor

Keyword(s):

Healthcare System ◽

Governance Structure ◽

Network Governance ◽

Public Healthcare ◽

Structured Interviews ◽

General Validity ◽

Regional Administration ◽

Trade Offs ◽

Italian Regions ◽

Cancer Networks

Abstract Background This study focuses on the application of Provan and Kenis’ modes of network governance to the specific field of public healthcare networks, extending the framework to an analysis of systems in which networks are involved. Thus, the aim of this study is to analyze and compare the governance of two cancer networks in two Italian regions that underwent system reconfiguration processes due to reforms in the healthcare system. Methods A qualitative study of two clinical networks in the Italian healthcare system was conducted. The sample for interviews included representatives of the regional administration (n = 4), network coordinators (n = 6), and general and clinical directors of health organizations involved in the two networks (n = 25). Data were collected using semi-structured interviews. Results Our study shows that healthcare system reforms have a limited impact on network governance structures. In fact, strong inertial tendencies characterize networks, especially network administrative organization models (NAO). Networks tend to find their own balance with respect to the trade-offs analyzed using a mix of formal and informal ties. Our study confirms the general validity of Provan and Kenis’ framework and shows how other specific factors and contingencies may affect the possibility that cancer networks find positive equilibria between competing needs of inclusivity and efficiency, internal and external legitimacy, and stability and flexibility. It also shows how networks react to external changes. Conclusions Our study shows the importance of considering three factors and contingencies that may affect network effectiveness: a) the importance of looking at network governance modes not in isolation, but in relationship to the governance of regional systems; b) the influence of a specific network’s governance structure on the network’s ability to respond to tensions and to achieve its goals; and c) the need to take into account the role of professionals in network governance.

Download Full-text

Power and conflict in network governance: exclusive and inclusive forms of network administrative organizations

Public Management Review ◽

10.1080/14719037.2021.1930121 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-21

Author(s):

Asa Maron ◽

Avishai Benish

Keyword(s):

Network Governance

Download Full-text

A network of networks

Journal of Health Organization and Management ◽

10.1108/jhom-07-2016-0146 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 31 (2) ◽

pp. 223-236 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Rick Iedema ◽

Raj Verma ◽

Sonia Wutzke ◽

Nigel Lyons ◽

Brian McCaughan

Keyword(s):

Health Service ◽

Health System ◽

Network Governance ◽

System Reform ◽

System Transformation ◽

Content Type ◽

Multiple Networks ◽

Network Of Networks

Purpose To further our insight into the role of networks in health system reform, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how one agency, the NSW Agency for Clinical Innovation (ACI), and the multiple networks and enabling resources that it encompasses, govern, manage and extend the potential of networks for healthcare practice improvement. Design/methodology/approach This is a case study investigation which took place over ten months through the first author’s participation in network activities and discussions with the agency’s staff about their main objectives, challenges and achievements, and with selected services around the state of New South Wales to understand the agency’s implementation and large system transformation activities. Findings The paper demonstrates that ACI accommodates multiple networks whose oversight structures, self-organisation and systems change approaches combined in dynamic ways, effectively yield a diversity of network governances. Further, ACI bears out a paradox of “centralised decentralisation”, co-locating agents of innovation with networks of implementation and evaluation expertise. This arrangement strengthens and legitimates the role of the strategic hybrid – the healthcare professional in pursuit of change and improvement, and enhances their influence and impact on the wider system. Research limitations/implications While focussing the case study on one agency only, this study is unique as it highlights inter-network connections. Contributing to the literature on network governance, this paper identifies ACI as a “network of networks” through which resources, expectations and stakeholder dynamics are dynamically and flexibly mediated and enhanced. Practical implications The co-location of and dynamic interaction among clinical networks may create synergies among networks, nurture “strategic hybrids”, and enhance the impact of network activities on health system reform. Social implications Network governance requires more from network members than participation in a single network, as it involves health service professionals and consumers in a multi-network dynamic. This dynamic requires deliberations and collaborations to be flexible, and it increasingly positions members as “strategic hybrids” – people who have moved on from singular taken-as-given stances and identities, towards hybrid positionings and flexible perspectives. Originality/value This paper is novel in that it identifies a critical feature of health service reform and large system transformation: network governance is empowered through the dynamic co-location of and collaboration among healthcare networks, particularly when complemented with “enabler” teams of people specialising in programme implementation and evaluation.

Download Full-text